Organizations: 1JD Explore Academy, China. · 5South China University of Technology, China. · School of Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China. · 3Shenzhen Institute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics for Society, China. · 6Sun Yat-sen University, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China.
Abstract
Vision-language-action (VLA) models remain brittle in manipulation tasks that require physical commonsense. Current physical VQA data is typically disembodied and misaligned with robot action domains. Egocentric videos are used only as auxiliary pre-training. It remains unclear whether improved VLM physical understanding actually benefits downstream action generation. Therefore, we present CometVLA to close this gap. We construct CometData and CometBench, an embodied physical VQA corpus and benchmark strictly aligned with the robot's action data and embodiment. We introduce Global Action Prior (GAP) tokens, a compact learnable bottleneck that isolates task-agnostic motion regularities and lets the action head consume physical commonsense without corrupting the pre-trained VLM backbone. We co-train CometVLA across the embodied data pyramid, spanning teleoperation, simulation, egocentric trajectories, and VQA layers. On real-world manipulation tasks and RoboTwin simulation, CometVLA consistently outperforms strong VLA baselines. Correlation analysis shows that stronger VLM performance on CometBench indicates higher VLA success rates. Results demonstrate that physical understanding pre-training genuinely benefits downstream manipulation.
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) systems, built on pretrained vision-language models (VLMs), have shown rapidly improving performance on robot manipulation benchmarks. These gains are commonly interpreted as evidence that semantic representations learned from internet-scale data transfer to physical execution generalization. This position paper argues that the assumption underlying this interpretation -- that semantic generalization is sufficient to support physical action decisions -- has not been independently verified and cannot be tested under current evaluation protocols. We support this claim by decomposing VLA policies into semantic mapping and physical action decision, and showing that task success rate -- the dominant evaluation metric -- cannot distinguish between these two sources of capability. As a result, improvements in benchmark performance are consistent with multiple competing explanations, including semantic matching, distributional overlap, and genuine physical generalization. We further argue that this identifiability gap has been reinforced through narrative drift, whereby successive systems inherit and strengthen prior interpretations of performance gains without isolating the underlying causal mechanism. To address this limitation, we propose a research direction based on evaluation designs that introduce controlled variation to separately measure semantic and physical generalization. Such designs make it possible to causally attribute performance without requiring access to model internals, and to empirically assess the role of VLM backbones as semantic interfaces rather than implicit sources of physical competence. Our goal is not to refute the role of VLMs in robotics, but to clarify the conditions under which claims of physical generalization can be meaningfully evaluated.
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are fundamentally bottlenecked by the scarcity of expert demonstrations -- triplets of observations, instructions, and actions that are costly to collect at scale. We argue that this bottleneck stems from conflating two distinct learning objectives: acquiring physical competence (how to move) and acquiring semantic alignment (what to do). Crucially, only the latter requires language supervision. Building on this Decomposition Hypothesis, we propose Task-Agnostic Pretraining (TAP), a two-stage framework that first learns transferable motor priors from cheap, unlabeled interaction data -- including discarded off-task trajectories and autonomous robot play -- via a self-supervised Inverse Dynamics objective. A lightweight second stage then grounds these priors in language using minimal expert data. On the SIMPLER benchmark, TAP matches models trained on over 1M expert trajectories while using orders of magnitude less labeled data, yielding a 10% absolute gain over standard behavior cloning. On a real-world WidowX platform, TAP retains 25% success under camera perturbations where internet-scale baselines collapse to 0%, demonstrating that task-agnostic pretraining produces robust, transferable physical representations and offers a scalable path forward for Embodied AI.
Despite remarkable progress in Vision--Language--Action (VLA) models, a central bottleneck remains underexamined: the data infrastructure that underlies embodied learning. In this survey, we argue that future advances in VLA will depend less on model architecture and more on the co-design of high-fidelity data engines and structured evaluation protocols. To this end, we present a systematic, data-centric analysis of VLA research organized around three pillars: datasets, benchmarks, and data engines. For datasets, we categorize real-world and synthetic corpora along embodiment diversity, modality composition, and action space formulation, revealing a persistent fidelity-cost trade-off that fundamentally constrains large-scale collection. For benchmarks, we analyze task complexity and environment structure jointly, exposing structural gaps in compositional generalization and long-horizon reasoning evaluation that existing protocols fail to address. For data engines, we examine simulation-based, video-reconstruction, and automated task-generation paradigms, identifying their shared limitations in physical grounding and sim-to-real transfer. Synthesizing these analyses, we distill four open challenges: representation alignment, multimodal supervision, reasoning assessment, and scalable data generation. Addressing them, we argue, requires treating data infrastructure as a first-class research problem rather than a background concern.